Alan Cox writes ("Re: Corruption caused by umount not flushing the buffer cache."):
> [Attribution lost - pjb]
> > I know I can get around this by forcing a BLKFLSBUF ioctl to the device after
> > the unmount but this strikes me as a bug in the linux umount semantics which
> > will bite more people than just me as linux enters the SAN arena.
>
> Solve policy problems in user space. If you want a umount to do that put
> it in the _application_. I don't want my caches flushing all the time just
> because I remount stuff
How often do you remount stuff? I suspect that it's so infrequently
that you would not noticably suffer from caches being flushed.
On the other hand, people (including myself) do get bitten by caches
that survive unmount/mount. Flushing the caches is the safe behaviour.
Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 31 2000 - 21:00:16 EST